首页> 外文学位 >Distinguishing Socratic philosophy from Gorgianic rhetoric (Plato).
【24h】

Distinguishing Socratic philosophy from Gorgianic rhetoric (Plato).

机译:将苏格拉底哲学与高尔基修辞学(柏拉图)区分开。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Plato maintained throughout his career that the characterization of Socrates as a sophist and a corrupting influence on Athenian youth was unfounded. However, he struggled to develop a principled explanation of the differences between what Socrates and the sophists did. Plato's challenge was to establish not only that they were different from each other but also that Socrates' practice was more admirable. I examine Plato's approach to this challenge and evaluate his success in meeting it.; Among the "early" dialogues, the Gorgias is most forceful in its presentation and defense of the difference between Socratic elenchus and sophistic practice. These arguments in the Gorgias turn on Plato's construal of the differences between t3&d12;cn ai (technai, crafts) and 3 ,mp3i ri&d12;ai (empeiriai, knacks). Crucial to the distinction between crafts and knacks is the epistemically privileged position of the craftsman: he understands his practice to such an extent that he is able to explain in sufficiently general terms how the steps definitive of his practice reliably lead to the good at which he aims. Although Socrates in this dialogue speaks in supremely confident terms about what his practice of elenchus can achieve, I find that his assertions on this score are unwarranted. I show that Socratic methodological ignorance undercuts his claims to practice a craft.; In the second half of the dissertation, I argue that Socrates' account in the Theaetetus of his practice as a form of midwifery overcomes the problems with his position as it is presented in the Gorgias. Here, Socrates provides the sort of account of his practice required by the Gorgias's concept of a craft. In particular, he is shown to understand the psychological effects of his use of elenctic arguments. I argue that this account is grounded on a thoroughly rational foundation, given a plausible understanding of Socratic piety. Since there are excellent reasons for reading these two dialogues together, we can plausibly view the Theaetetus as solving the problem to which the Gorgias pointed, namely, that of the classification and defense of Socrates' practice of elenchus as a craft.
机译:柏拉图在他的整个职业生涯中都坚持认为,苏格拉底是个诡辩主义者,并且对雅典年轻人的腐败影响没有根据。但是,他努力地对苏格拉底和苏菲派之间所做的区别进行了原则性的解释。柏拉图面临的挑战是不仅要确保它们彼此不同,而且还要使苏格拉底的做法更令人钦佩。我研究了柏拉图应对挑战的方法,并评估了他在应对挑战方面的成功。在“早期”对话中,戈尔吉亚人最有力的表现是捍卫苏格拉底式的共产主义与先进的实践之间的差异。戈尔吉亚人中的这些论点开启了柏拉图对t3&d12; cn ai(技术,手工艺品)和3,mp3iri&d12; ai(empeiriai,小玩意)之间差异的解释。对手工艺和小玩意的区分至关重要的是,工匠在知识上享有特权:他了解自己的实践,以至于他能够以足够笼统的方式解释他的实践中确定的步骤如何可靠地带来他所要获得的好处。目标。尽管苏格拉底在这次对话中以极其自信的措辞谈论了他的实践实践所能取得的成就,但我发现他对此分数的主张是毫无根据的。我证明苏格拉底式的方法学上的无知削弱了他实践手工艺品的主张。在论文的后半部分,我认为苏格拉底在他的《 Theaetetus》中作为助产士形式的论述克服了他在戈尔吉亚人中所表现出的地位问题。在这里,苏格拉底提供了Gorgias手工艺概念所要求的实践经验。特别是,他被证明能够理解使用电子论证的心理影响。我认为,鉴于对苏格拉底虔诚的合理理解,这种说法是建立在完全理性的基础上的。由于有很好的理由一起阅读这两个对话,我们可以合理地认为Theaetetus解决了Gorgias所指出的问题,即苏格拉底的Elenchus手工艺品的分类和防御问题。

著录项

  • 作者

    Levy, David.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Rochester.;

  • 授予单位 University of Rochester.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.; Literature Classical.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2005
  • 页码 174 p.
  • 总页数 174
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 哲学理论 ; 世界文学 ;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号